It's Like Wag the Dog

In the movie Wag the Dog, and American president and a movie producer faked a war in Albania to divert political attention form a domestic scandal.  They created fake but riveting film of desperate Albanians caught up in the war.  I always wondered how confused the people of Albania, sitting in their peaceful homes, were by these images if they saw them on CNN.

I live in Arizona, not Albania, but I am just as confused.  I have lived in Phoenix for 10 years.  I run a public contact business all over the state, including at least one location in sight of the Mexican border. And I am confused as can be when I read stuff like this:

Nevertheless, here it goes from a supporter of legal immigration: how are we to make sense of the current Arizona debate? One should show concern about some elements of the law, but only in the context of the desperation of the citizens of Arizona. And one should show some skepticism concerning mounting liberal anguish, so often expressed by those whose daily lives are completely unaffected by the revolutionary demographic, cultural, and legal transformations occurring in the American Southwest.

WTF?  I read this all the time.  I am told there is a war going on around me and people are being devastated, but I never see it.  And nobody I know ever sees it directly.  It is always a "someone else"  (maybe, as I suggested in an earlier post, it is all happening to that lady who put her cat in the microwave to dry.")

I won't spend all day with VDH's post, but there are a couple of other things he writes that seem nuts, given his reputation for being pretty smart

Why Wave the Flag of the Country I Don't Wish to Return To?

Have you ever been to a Saint Patrick's Day parade in Boston or Chicago? To Columbus Day parade in New York?  So its OK for Europeans to show some affinity for the mother country even as they reside in the US, but not Mexicans?

Look, I get irritated to no end by people who come here for freedom and prosperity and then immediately start advocating for and voting for steps that undermine both.   But that's not an immigrant issue, its a Constitutional one, where we have allowed courts to rewrite protections against government encroachment.

Substitute New York in 1860 for Arizona in 2010 and Irish for Mexican, and you would see the exact same dynamics at work, except that Arizona in 2010 is a lot more peaceful than New York in 1860.

California's meltdown is instructive. If about half the nation's illegal aliens reside in the state, and its problems are in at least in some part attributable to soaring costs in educating hundreds of thousands of non-English-speaking students, a growing number of aliens in prison and the criminal justice system, real problems of collecting off-the-books income and payroll taxes, expanding entitlements, and unsustainable social services, do we wish to avoid its model?

Really?  One word:  Texas.  Texas has the same immigration issues and a MUCH longer border than California.  California's problems are its profligate and anti-business government, something that Conservatives tend to point out a lot in about a million comparisons with Texas, except of course when they want to blame it all on immigration instead.

First, there is the simplicity of the argument. One either wishes or does not wish existing law to be enforced. If the answer is no, and citizens can pick and chose which laws they would like to obey, in theory why should we have to pay taxes or respect the speed limit? Note that liberal Democrats do not suggest that we overturn immigration law and de jure open the border "” only that we continue to do that de facto.

This is hilarious in the context of Arizona.  While the AZ legislature has been passing this law, it has been passing a series of other laws to give the big FU to federal law.  These bills include not enforcing federal insurance mandates in AZ, not enforcing EPA CO2 regulations in AZ, ignoring federal law on commercialization of rest areas, ignoring the REAL ID act etc.  For God sakes this is the state whose Republican governor in the 1990's sent the national guard to take over the Grand Canyon from the feds.  To piously assert this is all about enforcing federal law and that it is wrong to ignore some laws but enforce others is absurd.  This country has a long history of popular nullification of bad laws -- the 55-mile an hour speed limit was nullified by rampant non-compliance long before it was repealed.

I understand there are complexities in immigration, the most important of which is the conflict between a generous safety net and open immigration.  But note that while many Conservatives will say this, none of them are proposing any changes to safety net eligibility vis a vis immigrants.  When all they ask for is for the borders to be locked down, then all these arguments just seem like window dressing to the true desire to say "my family got in, now its time to lock the door."


  1. morganovich:

    it seems to me that the parallel between healthcare and immigration is a very instructive one.

    in healthcare, being responsible for health costs leads government to attempt to control our food, exercise, and recreational habits.

    in immigration, paying for immigrants in healthcare, schools, prisons etc leads the government to encroach upon mobility and property rights. immigration is not the problem, the welfare net is. cut that off to illegals and change our law such that simply being born in our borders is not sufficient to grant citizenship, and the problem goes away just as reducing government health care gets them out of our personal lives.

    he who pays, decides.

    the answer is not keep paying and enact more rules, it's stop paying.

  2. TakeFive:

    ""Why Wave the Flag of the Country I Don’t Wish to Return To?" Have you ever been to a Saint Patrick’s Day parade in Boston or Chicago?"

    Yeah, And the flag of foreign dignitaries is displayed during state dinners. But the big difference is on is display in a sense of honor or conviviality, and on is displayed out of defiance. Think of hoisting the black flag, or Nazi banners at white supremist rallies. Cone by the next Mad Day rally here in LA and listen to the rhetoric of the flag wavers. It sounds nothing like a saint paddys day parade.

    “Really? One word: Texas. Texas has the same immigration issues and a MUCH longer border than California. California’s problems are its profligate and anti-business government,…”

    Here’s where you miss cause and effect. I don’t recall seeing these massive illegal alien marches occurring in Texas like we had in LA. Why, because California goes out of it’s way to attract illegals.

    Here’s one example. My wife speaks Spanish an knows many aliens, both legal and otherwise. She recently met a gal who is here illegally from Mexico and is living in a subsidized apartment in Santa Monica, 2 blocks from the beach. Mind you this is one of the priciest areas in So Cal. Her rent? $450 per month.

    This gal said the housing board told her that they were not concerned with immigration status. Their only job was to help people in need.

    Now that Arizona is less hospitable to illegals, where do you think they’ll go? Texas that has “the same issues” as California, or California?

    Really Warren, your letting your bias cloud your reason here.

  3. Colin:

    Agree with the overall sentiment but have to part ways a bit on the flag-waving. It irritates the hell out of me when I watch the US national soccer team play Mexico on US soil and, not only see a sea of green, but more importantly hear the boos rain down on US players and whistles during the national anthem. Hey, you want to support the old country, fine, but don't crap on the country you immigrated to.

    I also don't understand it when people wave the Mexican flag at immigration rallies. From a PR perspective it doesn't look good when you try to show how much you appreciate this country by expressing allegiance and fondness for another. More radical elements among the Mexican population here in the US view themselves as simply Mexicans who happen to reside here or even simply taking back land which was originally Mexican (sentiment which is not exactly discouraged by textbooks and classroom instruction in Mexico).

    Just last year I was in Castroville, CA and stopped into a bakery, where the woman working there couldn't speak a word of English. I had to ask in Spanish if they accepted credit cards (they didn't). Obviously she is able to get by in the US without knowing any English, and given access to Spanish language television, radio, newspapers, and a heavily Hispanic population that isn't too surprising. But it makes me wonder about societal cohesion when people can't even understand each other. My Spanish girlfriend is constantly amazed at the number of people who live in the US she runs into with incredibly weak English skills. It has to be a melting pot, not just a chunky stew.

    I currently live in a neighborhood in Washington DC which features a lot of immigrants from Central America. I have no problem with them at all -- they just want to work and make a better life for themselves. Most, if not all, speak at least a little bit of English. This is pretty much because they have to, with their options hugely restricted if they don't blend in. But in some parts of the country the immigrant population can be so big that it forms its own community and integration efforts are at least delayed.

    To the extent I am wary about immigration it is simply that there may be too many immigrants from too few countries (basically Mexico) which produces ethnic Balkanization. I think there may be some legitimate concerns there which I haven't really seen libertarians address in any detail. I will grant, however, that US policy is at least partially responsible for much of the current mess. US drug policy, for example, has created the endemic violence which wracks northern Mexico, and a hardened border can actually create unintended consequences (you may only want to come to the US temporarily for work, but end up staying because once you're in, why risk a border crossing again?). Divisions are also exacerbated by the welfare state (competition for governmetn resources) and ethnic-based government policies (namely affirmative action).

    Lastly, frankly I do view St. Patrick's day celebrations and the number of Americans who have some romanticism about Ireland rather bizarre. And I say this as someone whose middle name is Patrick and has been to the dinky little village my Irish side of the family came from. It was easy to see why they left -- a grim place, mostly tree-less and a cold wind blowing in off the Atlantic. No wonder they ended up in California.

  4. Fred from Canuckistan:

    At the rate Obama is ruining the US economy with reckless deficits and great gobs of new unfunded entitlements, you may find this illegal immigration issue is a self correcting problem when nobody perceives a broke and indebted America as a soft touch for free stuff any longer.

    Freedom will be trumped by free stuff and when the free stuff dries up, so will issue.

    Something like "If you debt it, they won't come"

  5. IgotBupkis:

    Yeah, I'm kinda with TF here. I live in Florida, which doesn't have quite the exact same issues with illegals but does have similar problems with assimilation.

    Example: 30-odd years ago, my uncle was a cop in WPB. He had to go down to Miami for a prisoner transport. He got to the precinct. It took him 30 minutes to find a cop who spoke English. The precinct required that cops there speak Spanish. I have not the least problem with that, it makes perfect sense. It did not have any requirement that the officers spoke English. THAT, I do have a problem with.

    Two of the problems here vs. previous examples are easy:

    a) Sense of entitlement. Even the illegals here have a sense of entitlement -- they've been told that everything Americans have is because they've stolen it, and that means everyone here deserves a piece, even the illegals.

    b) Multiculti BS. There's no element of American exceptionalism being taught, or even acked, across the board. Formerly, people who were here were grateful that they were here, and I believe they only wanted the same fair shot at success that others had for being here first. The current generation thinks that there is nothing exceptional about America except that it's managed to steal more than most. So "being American" isn't about adopting a set of ideals and notions about freedom, work and country, it's about who gets a piece of the pie. So there is, I think, a very different attitude as to what it means to be "Mexican American" vs. what it meant to be "Irish American", in at least some large percentage of the applicable populace.

    As others have noted, it may well be, Warren, that you DON'T see that among the people around you because all of those gimme gimme swine went to Cali no matter where they crossed the border -- whereas the ones who legitimately seek what America has to offer have settled where you are.

  6. Ed McCabe:

    Odd reasoning from a usually reliable man of reason.

    Of course the states have the right - indeed, the duty - to pick and choose between federal laws that they find acceptable and those that, in the view of the states and the people (who have the last word, if you attend to the meaning of the 10th Amendment), violate the constitution and are therefore not to be enforced.

    So how do you find hilarity in such a proposition? The immigration laws have been with us for a very long time, and they represent, based on considerable history, the consent of the governed (the people) and the states. The over-reach of the latest legislation you cite, all premised on a hilarious reading of the commerce clause by the federal government meant to be held in check by various constitutional provisions, is in my view, and obviously in the view of thousands of my fellow citizens and of a number of the states, within the legitimate purview of the people and the states to be challenged.

    I fail to see much humor in that.

  7. IgotBupkis:

    > or even simply taking back land which was originally Mexican (sentiment which is not exactly discouraged by textbooks and classroom instruction in Mexico)


    Only in Mexico???


  8. IgotBupkis:

    > This is pretty much because they have to, with their options hugely restricted if they don’t blend in. But in some parts of the country the immigrant population can be so big that it forms its own community and integration efforts are at least delayed.

    Indeed, Warren, I consider this a likely argument why the Hispanic infusion is different from prior infusions. Certainly with previous ones, the first generation learned English, though often limited and poorly. Often they stuck to an enclave of like-sourced immigrants in NYC, and never got really good at English. Their children, though, learned English "and often" the mother tongue. THEIR children often spoke the mother tongue haltingly, usually only as much as they'd learned to around their GPs, since the parents spoke English around the home. By the time you got to the fourth gen, if they learned the mother tongue it was probably as part of language classes in High School.

    I challenge the argument that this historical pattern is being followed with the current educational and social environment -- even with non-Hispanics**.

    I'm open to proof I'm wrong, but I'd want you to demonstrate it, as I don't believe it's being followed.

    **Case in point: Florida grades its schools each year. In those rare cases where a school has received three "F" grades in a row, the parents at that school are allowed to pull their kids out of that school and enroll them into any other county school of their choice.

    Now, in the Orlando area (Apopka) there was such a flunking school. While a large number of parents did pull their kids out, the following should be noted:

    a) The principal and many of the teachers were seen wearing T-shirts that said "F for 'Fantastic'". What does THAT tell the kids?
    b) More critically, there were a very large number of parents who were NOT taking their kids out of the school. Why? Because THAT specific school was in a predominantly Haitian enclave, and the teachers there spoke, and taught, classes in Haitian. The parents were choosing to keep their kids in that environment, even if it meant sub-standard education for their kids.

    >>>> WTF!?!?!? <<<<

    When parents think that having their kids taught in the HAITIAN language was more critical than learning basic skills in school, there's something fundamentally wrong with them as parents in America. These people need to move back to flinkin' Haiti in a reverse "boat lift".

    I've lost the link to the article, unfortunately. IIRC, it was around 2005 or 2006, and was referenced in the Orlando Sentinel's online section.

  9. ColoComment:

    Warren, you need to recognize that you're living in a social bubble. You may not see "the war" going on around you, but I assure you, it's there. My son is a police officer in a [upscale] suburb of Phoenix, and the stories he has to tell about the gangs, the illegals, and the overall criminal "element" (as we used to say) would astound you.

    In addition, I've lived in Ft. Collins, Colorado, for 6 years now, and you'd be hard-pressed to find a better example of an American upper-middle class small city. It's a thriving university town, with high percentage professionals and successful small-businessmen in its population.

    Last fall I attended the local county sheriff department's "citizen academy" and oh my, did I get educated about the "rest" of the story. There is a local population segment that is typically not experienced by the mainstream folk (like me, and you) who responsibly pursue their daily work & family lives. The members of this segment are well-known to local law enforcement, populate the county detention center, are repetitive offenders, and impose high enforcement and social costs on the community. You'd be as surprised as I was to learn how many gangs and gang members there are in your greater community.

    You might inquire at your local police or sheriff department, interview some LE personnel, ask if you can visit your local detention center & speak with them about crime and criminals in your local jurisdiction.

    (Of course, implicit in this comment are the standard caveats: no, not all illegals are criminal actors; no, not every person of color deserves jailing; no, not every gang member is a crim..., oh wait.)

  10. skh.pcola:

    I am told there is a war going on around me and people are being devastated, but I never see it. And nobody I know ever sees it directly. It is always a “someone else”

    Paging Pauline Kael!

  11. boqueronman:

    1. From Heather MacDonald's study of Mexican ILLEGAL immigration hypocrisy: "Just how shameless is Mexico in promoting illegal entry into the U.S.? For starters, it publishes a comic book–style guide on breaching the border safely and evading detection once across. Mexico’s foreign ministry distributes the Guía del Migrante Mexicano (Guide for the Mexican Migrant) in Mexico; Mexican consulates along the border hand it out in the U.S. The pamphlet is also available on the website of the Instituto de los Mexicanos en el Exterior, or IME (Institute for Mexicans Abroad), the cabinet-level agency that promotes Mexicanismo in the U.S." This is just one of many examples proving her initial hypothesis. The Mexican economy desperately requires a substantial inflow of remittances to stay afloat. These uninvited "guests," under present economic circumstances, take jobs and income from American citizens. See the many stories on former tradition teen age summer jobs with hundreds of applications from adults.

    2. For Spanish speakers, here is a relevant section of the Mexican Ley General de Poblacion on how the Mexicans deal with Immigration Law:

    "Artículo 37.- La Secretaría de Gobernación podrá negar a los extranjeros la entrada al país o el cambio de calidad o característica migratoria por cualesquiera de los siguientes motivos, cuando:I.- No exista reciprocidad internacional;II.- Lo exija el equilibrio demográfico nacional;III.- No lo permitan las cuotas a que se refiere el artículo 32 de esta Ley;IV.- Se estime lesivo para los intereses económicos de los nacionales;V.- Hayan infringido las leyes nacionales o tengan malos antecedentes en el extranjero;VI.- Hayan infringido esta Ley, su Reglamento u otras disposiciones administrativas aplicables en lamateria, o no cumplan con los requisitos establecidos en los mismos; VII.- No se encuentren física o mentalmente sanos a juicio de la autoridad sanitaria; oVIII.- Lo prevean otras disposiciones legales.Artículo 38.- Es facultad de la Secretaría de Gobernación, suspender o prohibir la admisión deextranjeros, cuando así lo determine el interés nacional."

    So "foreigners" can be denied entry into Mexico for such things as "lack of physical or mental capacity" or, even better, in accordance with the "national interest."

    "Artículo 43.- La admisión al país de un extranjero lo obliga a cumplir estrictamente con las condiciones que se le fijen en el permiso de internación y las disposiciones que establecen las leyes respectivas."

    "Artículo 126.- En los casos en que se atente en contra de la soberanía o la seguridad nacional, la expulsión será definitiva."

    Yes, please, just drive the truck through Article 126.

    3. Article IV, Section 4 of the U.S. Constitution reads as follows: "The United States shall guarantee to every State in the Union a Republican Form of Government, and shall protect each of them against Invasion; and on Application of the Legislature, or of the Excecutive (when the Legislature cannot be convened) against domestic Violence." Is the flow of illegal (in a country which purportedly is based on the Rule of Law) immigration an "invasion." If it isn't then what is it? The nature of the "invasion" can be seen up close and personal by anyone attending a Mexican-US national soccer team game ANYWHERE in the U.S. And these "spectators" are NOT Mexicans who have obtained legal visas and traveled to the U.S. to attend the game. Since the USG has defaulted on it's constitutional responsibility the task has fallen on the state governments themselves. Here's wishing them luck.

  12. Che is dead:

    “my family got in, now its time to lock the door.”

    Same old tired anti-conservative bullshit. The U.S. takes in more legal immigrants than all the other nations of the world combined. What part of that do you not understand? No one is "locking the door". How pathetic, that your first reaction is to cast aspersions on your fellow citizens. If we do not favor open and unlimited immigration, then we must by racist and anti-immigrant. Grow up.

  13. caseyboy:

    Dan from Canuckistan - you have it right. Before Obama is through we will have net emigration from the US. In order to keep them coming he'll have to create more entitlements to share with them.

    I think the people of AZ should educate the illegals about all the perks and entitlements available in California and provide safe passage if that is their final destination.

  14. mahtso:

    Because the blogger has not personally seen the problems, he asserts these must not be real. The blogger often posts on his regulatory problems trying to run a business. I have not personally seen these regulatory problems. Consequently, these must not exist and the blogger has merely made them up.

  15. zero wolf:

    senor coyote, it might be time for you to rethink your charitable, sort-of-libertarian notions in re illegal immigration. you've posted several entries like this in the last few months, and the comments on them have been pretty much 100% in opposition to what you said. and that's 100% (or pretty damn close) disagreement from people who *like* what you have to say enough to visit here. so presumably, they're folks who see things the way you do and tend to agree with your stated worldview.

    except when it comes to illegal immigration. then, and only then, everyone suddenly disagrees with you.

    i'm one of those disagreers. having been born & raised in a city located precisely on the mexican border, i can guarantee you i've *forgotten* more about illegals and the havoc they wreak on our society than you'll ever know. and you're not just wrong about this, you're INCREDIBLY wrong. i very much agree with what colocomment said earlier here: i think you're living in a social bubble. as a (presumably) successful business owner, your income pretty much ensures that you're not going to see the true face of the illegals. you've got a high-end house in a high-end neighborhood, right? living like that isn't going to get you an accurate picture, amigo. try listening to your commenters - people who DO see the way things really are. consider the 4/26 comment from 'dennis', "an arizona prosecutor" on your 4/22 post titled "immigration and crime". HE says that (roughly) a third of the crimes he prosecutes are done by illegals. (actually more than a third, as ICE procedures prevent a lot of 'illegal' crime from ever getting into the system.) who ya figure knows more about that stuff? a prosecutor, or a businessman? i'm also guessing it's a safe bet you've never had a loved one become a victim of a crime committed by an illegal. you'd be *surprised* how fast that'll kill off a 'unicorns farting rainbows' worldview.

    i'm all for a man standing true to his principles, even in the face of overwhelming opposition. but if *every single commenter here* says you're wrong about this, it may be time to ask: is it remotely possible that you - and ONLY you - are in the right? can EVERYone else here but you be wrong? is EVERYone here but you a heartless racist troglodyte?? not likely.....

  16. D-man:

    "I am told there is a war going on around me and people are being devastated, but I never see it."

    I believe many of the WWII-era Germans who lived in the villages surrounding the death camps uttered the same words, Warren. I guess all of those dead Jews and German outcasts were simply figments of someone's imagination, too.

    "I never see it." What's that old Ray Stevens song say? "There's none so blind as he who cannot see"?

    Rob Krentz. You mustn't be able to see his ranch from your backyard, so everything is just fine and dandy.

    Your blind view of the world is as naive as "all of my friends love Obama, so everyone must love the guy." Problem is, you don't know everyone, nor do you empathize with those who have clearly been touched by the war that is going on around you. It's what you don't, or won't, see that is your issue.

  17. TakeFive:

    A couple of the dimmer bulbs on the LA city council, as well as the mayor of San Francisco and the state senate majority leader have all proposed some sort of sanctions against the state of Arizona.

    Rush Limbaugh had an artful response this morning. He suggested Arizona officials advise illegal aliens of the state and city resources available - in California!

    I got a laugh out of that, even as a So Cal resident. Imagine if the Arizona government published a comic book like the mexican one called "Emigrating to California - Your Guide to Free Stuff". On the back would be a coupon for a one way bus ride and an chance to win a prize when you get here.

    I'm guessing May Day and Cinco de Mayo in downtown LA are going to just be a riot this year.

  18. TakeFive:

    Warren wrote:

    "This is hilarious in the context of Arizona. While the AZ legislature has been passing this law, it has been passing a series of other laws to give the big FU to federal law. These bills include not enforcing federal insurance mandates in AZ, not enforcing EPA CO2 regulations in AZ, ignoring federal law on commercialization of rest areas, ignoring the REAL ID act etc."

    Hilarious? How you could reason this makes no sense, particularly as a professed libertarian.

    Could it be that the federal government was specifically tasked at the time of its creation to protect against foreign invasion, but not regulate CO2, rest areas, or insurance? Yet the federal government has chosen to abdicate one of its principal duties in favor of meddling in state issues.

  19. ColoComment:

    How fun. I see that my son lives a few miles from you, Warren, on a line running directly east of you, in the suburb just east of yours.

    If you're interested in broadening your LE experience, a good place to start is doing a ride along with a local LE agency. I see that your city police department has a ride along program; you can find the info on your city's website. However, I'd suggest that Phoenix itself, or one of the other larger Phoenix suburbs that has a multi-level socio-economic population, would provide a more representative experience of local conditions. Most LE agencies welcome the interest of and participation by the public -- they are proud of what they do "to protect and serve."

    I have done several ride alongs with my son (both where he is now and when he used to work on the south side of Tucson) as well as with my local (Colorado) county sheriff department. A ride along is well worth the time and effort if one really wants to learn what a scary world it is out there and what it takes to secure our sheltered social environment. A real eye-opener.

  20. J. Wilson:

    I tend to agree with Hanson most of the time, but I have to admit you made some good points, particularly about Arizona's history of acting against Federal laws. However, I still see two ways in which today's illegal Mexican immigrant issue is uniquely problematic and different from the previous immigrant waves:

    1) The vast majority of immigrants arriving in the 1800's weren't here illegally - they were processed at the port, and sometimes they were actively recruited to cross the ocean. When one's first act on U.S. soil is to break the the law (crossing illegally), it doesn't bode well for the rest of your stay.

    2) Unlike the 2,000-mile mostly-open border with Mexico, we don't share any physical border with Ireland or any other nation from which immigrants are/were fleeing. Ocean-crossing immigrations are limited by the number of ships available, while the flow of immigrants from Mexico is theoretically unlimited. In addition, an illegal Mexican immigrant in the Southwest U.S. is physically able to pass back and forth across the border, thus never really leaving Mexico behind either physically or in spirit. Most of the ocean-crossing immigrants, on the other hand, arrived and were here to stay, period. When the latter wave the flag of their old country, I'm under no illusion that they are being hostile to their new home. But I'm not equally confident about someone from Mexico who really does have one foot in each country.

  21. Dr. T:

    Illegal immigration has serious financial impacts on border states such as Arizona. The biggest impact is on public schools. They must accept children of illegal immigrants, but those immigrants often live in unregistered converted garages and basements and pay no property taxes. Thus, the school-related property taxes of citizens and legal immigrants must be raised. The second biggest impact is on hospitals that must treat everyone who comes to the Emergency Department regardless of ability to pay. My brother works at a big hospital in Tucson, and its ED loses millions of dollars a year. Those losses are made up by increasing the charges to paying patients and begging the local and state government for taxpayer-funded subsidies.

  22. astonerii:

    "This country has a long history of popular nullification of bad laws"
    And unpopular nullification just got the popular enforcement of good laws. We live in a civil society, and this particular civil society does not want foreigners, no matter what country they come from: from entering this country with out government invitation; staying in this country, sometimes beyond an invitation's limits; working in any manner with out the express consent of the government; using up vital resources that the civil legal residents provide; and working towards damaging our culture of responsibility any more than the legal residents have already accomplished.

    1) The fact that many of the uninsured in this country that abuse the emergency rooms of hospitals helped give credibility to the argument for Health Care Reform. They claim that only 8 million illegals are uninsured, but I would imagine that is about as true as the 11 million illegal aliens residing in the country, a number that has not changed for 8 years. I would imagine that the true number of illegals is much closer to the 20m and probably surpasses that number than I would imagine it is less.

    2) The fact that many of the children of illegal aliens do not speak English is used repeatedly to get more and more funding for schools to teach English as a second language courses as well as increasing the number of special needs classes that get more and more money from tax payers every year as they grow out of control.

    Americans should not be forced to accommodate illegal alien needs. Americans should not have to compete with illegal alien workers for jobs. Americans should not have to change its laws in order to protect illegal aliens. Americans should not ever under any circumstance see a bunch of illegal aliens waving their home countries flag while denouncing how unfair we are.

    You do have any problems with the illegal aliens, that is just splendid, but it only takes one single illegal alien doing one additional illegal activity negatively affecting the life of one legal resident of the United States of America to be one too many period. What, you think the illegals are just doing the crime that Americans are just too moral to commit, but if the illegals were not here some American would be forced to fill the void?

  23. TVH:


    What do they say in World of Warcraft? You've been pwned!

    Your loyal readers appear to have knowledge of a world beyond Scottsdale. A friend of mine has a brother who is a sergeant in the Seattle Police Force. He works on drug enforcement and has been on the Swat team. The amount of crime in the Seattle area linked directly to illegals and their gangs is astronomical. And we're a thousand miles from the southern border.

    If it's that bad here, I can't imagine what one would learn on a ride-along down there, as one of your readers suggests.

    When you go do that ride-along, be sure to blog your findings. Thanks.


  24. Esteban:


    I agree with you entirely that the problems in California are due more to socialist policy than to the presence of illegal immigrants, but I think this is all beyond the point.

    Who is voting for the Democrats who implement these horrible policies without opposition?

    The Latinos! California used to be a white and conservative state pre 1980's. The influx of Latinos is a massive problem, because they are not particularily interested in working in many cases, (the children of immigrants typically, not the immigrants themselves) and after a generation or two, they develop a sense of victimhood and entitlement and vote for the corrupt socialist parasites who give them little handouts. They are the new black population.

    As we call it in Argentina, "Clientelismo"...

    Obama is more similar to Chavez, Kirchner, Morales, and Correa than one would think. We as Latinos are so stupid that we can't figure out why we're so damn poor! I wish some of my Mexican friends would understand that Obama and his kind are the very cause of the type of poverty they live in in Mexico.

    Immigration needs to be slowed to maintain the ethnic equilibrium and breed a bit of assimilation. If not, the Democrats will have a practically unbeatable combination of blacks, hispanics, and stupid whites who will give them free rein to turn this country into a socialist shit hole...

  25. epobirs:

    Anecdotal point: Yesterday morning my neighborhood had the pleasure of being awoken at 5 AM by the emergency sirens of the prison a few miles away. I cannot imagine what it would be like to be on the actual prison ground when that happens. It verged on painful in my previous home a bit closer to the facility.

    Anyway, a pair of armed robbers who had a sentencing hearing coming up next week, somehow went missing. So, much of the neighborhood got to spend the day with this nice bit of added anxiety until the escapees were apprehended. Guess what? Turns out these guys, like much of the population of that prison, are illegal aliens. People who should never have have been present in this country in the first place.

    My grandparents had to pass scrutiny to be allowed to enter this country. If they'd already possessed a criminal record when showing up at the port, the government would have been completely justified in shipping them back. I'm sure the place those two prisoners came from really sucks. So did the region where my ancestors left. The difference is that they came in legally and didn't take up crime after getting in. (And no, they never marched in any parade bearing a foreign flag.)

    We have substantial immigration into this country. Far more so than much of the rest of the developed world. If menial labor jobs are genuinely going begging for workers to fill them, rather than seeking peasants to brutally exploit for wages less than the cost of buying and maintaining a slave in the pre-Civil War era, let them make this need known to the federal bureaucracy that exists for this. It may be slow and frustrating but at least it has some vague hope of admitting the deserving while holding outside the criminal.

    We produce enough criminals of our own. We really don't need to import.

  26. Frink:

    @ D-Man

    "I guess all of those dead Jews and German outcasts were simply figments of someone’s imagination, too."

    Godwin's law, Warren wins this round.

  27. John Moore:

    I agree with many of the commenters. Warren, you are living in a bubble, or aren't paying attention. I live south of you a few miles, in an upscale neighborhood, so I too am in the bubble.

    But I used to live further S, in Arcadia, and when I now go back to the places I used to frequent, there is gang graffiti, visible gang members at night, bars on the windows of stores, signs often in Spanish only, and every other sign that we are being invaded, and the invasion includes violent criminals.

    I didn't used to carry a gun, but when the immigrant gangs started shooting people in vehicles for the fun of it (many years ago), I changed my mind.

    Folks have suggested a ride-along. Another way to vicariously experience what is going on in your city is to listen to a police or fire scanner (police are now all digital, so it is more of a hassle than it used to be).

    When I moved here over 35 years ago, I heard a shots fired call maybe once every few months. Now there are several an hour in the evening! They are almost all in Hispanic areas, which have been overrun with gangs. These gangs are not a transient phenomenon, unfortunately. The 9th street gang is into its fourth generation of members.

    If you don't think there's a war on, try driving around a few hours in west Phoenix - say, south of Camelback. If your windows are open, you'll hear the gunshots. If your lucky, you won't be a victim. That whole area was middle class and low crime until the invasion.

    Something about modern Hispanic immigration is very different ffom past waves. The people who come across tend to be law abiding (other than the crimes required to be here illegally) and work hard to earn money for their families here or down south. I've known many of them. However, too many of the second and third generation, instead of assimilating, are becoming a permanent urban criminal underclass, and that is devastating.

    Unless we change the conditions which cause this, which political correctness won't allow, we need to reverse the invasion.

    This is an issue where Libertarianism is about as realistic as Maoism. Please reconsider your opinions.

  28. IgotBupkis:

    >>>> “I guess all of those dead Jews and German outcasts were simply figments of someone’s imagination, too.”

    > Godwin’s law, Warren wins this round.

    Frink, "Any" reference to WWII's chief enemy as "off limits" is a ludicrously stupid and simplistic application of GL.

    The original principle was to apply to ACCUSATIONS of Nazi behavior, not any use of the events of WWII as a point of comparison or illustration without any accusations of association or similarity.

  29. IgotBupkis:

    I'm going to post this across a number of these immigration threads so that many will see it. I dunno how many people go back and look at older ones. Sorry if this is perceived as spam, but I think it's a good idea to understand how this wave of immigration compares to prior ones.

    It's a 2009 NYT interactive chart of census data showing immigration trends since 1880-2000 for any available data (some years data are absent, cf. Cuba-1930). You can narrow it down to specific nationalities and scan by decade for the period covered. It acks a "group" notion by color coding, etc., but unfortunately lacks any way to get collective info about that group -- you either have nations or "all".

    Immigration Chart

    In particular, compare the Italian or Russian immigrations of the past (I'm not sure Irish is a fair comparison, since many of the Irish entered before 1880) with that of "Mexico" starting in the 1960s. Notice how they built up to a far lower point, compared to population, than Mexico has, and Mexico shows NO sign of waning after 50 years, unlike those, which fall off noticeably after around 40-odd years.

    Warren's comparison of this wave to previous ones is vastly under-appreciative of the magnitude of this influx as a proportion to the population as a whole. People sense this, and here's DATA to show their concern is hardly inappropriate.

    H/T: No Oil For Pacifists

    He also apparently found one that breaks it down by profession. I haven't looked at that one just yet.